Football goal-line tracking tech delayed
Contenders fail to tickle Fifa's fancy
A programme to test the use of goal-line technology in football has been extended by a year, after none of the ten systems trialled last month met the criteria set by Fifa.
The systems were presented to the International Football Association Board last week at its annual meeting to review the sport's laws. But while snoods were banned and vanishing spray was approved, the assembled panelists couldn't agree whether the technology had scored or not.
Testing will continue, however, and the results of which will once again be presented at next year's
fixture Board meeting.
It's interesting to note that Sony today announced the acquisition of Hawk-Eye, a company specialising in technology for close-call decisions. Hawk-Eye - well known for its implementation in snooker, tennis and cricket - wasn't one of the ten technologies involved in the Fifa test, but its inventor, Paul Hawkins, last week publicly claimed Fifa would like Hawk-Eye to be included.
According to Hawkins, no proper guidelines have been set for what constitutes a pass or a fail in the technology trials. Fifa has only mandated that a decision must be reached within a second, with the result instantly transmitted to the referee.
"What is 100 per cent correct? Is it a centimetre or a millimetre [over the goal line]? Fifa would need to work through these details so it was a fair test for everyone involved," he said.
Hawkins said the cost of development isn't worthwhile unless such details made fully clear. Perhaps with Sony's money behind the company, Hawk-Eye will take a punt. ®
"none of the ten systems trialled last month met the criteria set by Fifa"
Lots of VIP trips to exotic places for progress meetings / demos?
Interesting that FIFA can state that all 10 systems failed when they (according to hawkeye at least) dont specify enough details to make a call about what constitutes a success or a failure.
Sounds like it turned out to be just what i expected from FIFA when they announced the test. i.e. FIFA would make some noise about trialling the tech, but then would make the requirements so vague and able to be interpreted in so many ways that everyone would be doomed to fail from the start, so FIFA can hold up there hands and say everyone failed so we cant change anything... yadda yadda yadda...
Same old, from the same old corrupt bastards...
Actually they are doing this...
... if you've watched any recent European games (Europa league or Champions League) you will see that they have an extra linesman at each end behind the goals to help officiate in the final third.
Theyre pretty much useless. Ive only ever seen them make a call twice (one about whether a tackle was inside the box or not, and 1 about the last touch before the ball went out), both times theyve been wrong. The extra refs are a waste of money, pure and simple.
At least with technology its hard to argue that a subjective decision is made rather then an objective decision. It might still turn out to be the wrong decision but you cant accuse technology of being biased for/against your team...
FIFA have no interest in this...
...for the simple reason that they will no longer be able to fix the results of world/regional international competition.
FIFA issues detailed "guidelines" to referees about how they want the rules "interpreted" - especially on WC qualifiers/tournament.
The results of which are clear for all to see - a clear bias towards the host country or the country which will generate most revenue for FIFA (France v Ireland, South Korea v Spain are particularly egregious cases).
None of this would be possible were there video replays available.
Havelange and his cronies corrupted FIFA and Blatter is happy to drive the gravy train.
WC (and to a lesser extent EUFA) international competitions have been "guided" to results/participants which FIFA want - rather than honest competition - for decades (1978 was when the real rot set in).
Let the goal keeper make the call.
Review every game.
If the keeper lies, he gets a two-year suspension without pay.
If he appeals the suspension there are only two possible outcomes: exoneration or a lifetime ban.